(AND CATS!) in CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS: LEGAL and ETHICAL ISSUES RELATING to COMPANION ANIMAL PROGRAMS Rebecca J
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
\\jciprod01\productn\N\NVJ\14-1\NVJ102.txt unknown Seq: 1 21-JAN-14 17:18 CANINES (AND CATS!) IN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS: LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES RELATING TO COMPANION ANIMAL PROGRAMS Rebecca J. Huss* I. INTRODUCTION Approximately one in 107 adults in the United States is incarcerated in some type of correctional institution.1 Effective programs are necessary to address the issues of these inmates. A growing number of correctional facilities allow for companion animals to be integrated into their programs in a variety of ways.2 A Dominican nun, Sister Pauline Quinn, is frequently credited with beginning the first dog-training program in the United States in a Washington State women’s correctional facility in 1981.3 A cable television program called * Rebecca J. Huss 2013. Professor of Law, Valparaiso University Law School; LL.M. University of Iowa, 1995; J.D. University of Richmond, 1992. 1 LAUREN E. GLAZE & ERIKA PARKS, U.S. DEP’TOF JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL POPULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES 1 (2012), available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail &iid=4537 (discussing the correctional population at the end of 2011, the most recent statis- tics available). At the end of 2011 approximately one out of thirty-four adults in the United States “was under some form of correctional supervision.” Id. The term correctional facility or institution will be used throughout this Article to refer to all institutions that are run by governmental entities or their private contractors for the housing of persons in the criminal justice system. In most cases, the types of programs discussed in this Article are in facilities for individuals who have been through the adjudication process, as inmates selected for the programs generally need sufficient time remaining in their sentences to support their participation. 2 See, e.g., Dana M. Britton & Andrea Button, Prison Pups: Assessing the Effects of Dog Training Programs in Correctional Facilities, 9 J. FAM. SOC. WORK 79, 80 (2005) (report- ing that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of programs but acknowledging there is no comprehensive data on the number of programs); Gennifer Furst, Prison-Based Animal Programs: A National Survey, 86 PRISON J. 407, 407 (2006) (reporting on a survey of state prison based animal programs, including programs that utilized animals for animal assisted therapy—a topic beyond the scope of this Article); Earl O. Strimple, A History of Prison Inmate-Animal Interaction Programs, 47 AM. BEHAV. SCIENTIST 70, 71, 74–77 (2003) (discussing both the historical and current prison-based programs and calling for more research in the area). The discussion of companion animals in this Article is limited to animals in care programs and inmate owned animals. Id. Note that there are several pro- grams that also train horses—these programs will not be considered in this Article. See id. at 76–77 (discussing equine programs). Issues relating to animals used for security, including animals used to detect contraband, are also beyond the scope of this Article. 3 E.g., Robin Brown, Program Improves Lives of Dogs, Inmate Trainers, NEWS J. (Wil- mington, Del.), Aug. 17, 2012, available at http://www.delawareonline.com/article/201208 25 \\jciprod01\productn\N\NVJ\14-1\NVJ102.txt unknown Seq: 2 21-JAN-14 17:18 26 NEVADA LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 14:25 Cell Dogs, broadcast in 2004, increased the visibility of these types of pro- grams.4 Reportedly, Cell Dogs triggered the establishment of programs in addi- tional facilities.5 New programs are being established on a regular basis.6 Some states have adopted the concept in greater measure.7 For example, the State of Washington has animal programs in all twelve of its correctional institutions and the State of Missouri has programs in eighteen of its facilities.8 These pro- grams are cited as conforming to a philosophy of “restorative justice” adopted by many departments of correction.9 17/NEWS/308170032/Program-improves-lives-dogs-inmate-trainers (attributing the first program to Sister Quinn and discussing a new program in Delaware and the trend of incor- porating these programs into correctional facilities). 4 See Julia Szabo, Dogs in Jail; Inmates and Strays Rehabilitate Each Other, N.Y. POST (Feb. 29, 2004, 12:00 AM) http://nypost.com/2004/02/29/dogs-in-jail-inmates-and-strays -rehabilitate-each-other/ (describing the Cell Dogs series as a reality television program on Animal Planet); Mark Todd, Dayton Helps Prison Inmates Go to the Dogs, STAR BEACON (Ashtabula, Ohio) (Dec. 7, 2009) http://starbeacon.com/currents/x546367090/Dayton-helps -prison-inmates-go-to-the-dogs (discussing the Pound Puppy program and stating it was fea- tured on the Discovery Channel’s Cell Dogs program). 5 Charles M. Bartholomew, New Leash on Life: Dogs, Inmates Pair Up in Dual Rehab Opportunity, POST-TRIB. (Merrillville, Ind.), Nov. 18, 2004, at A1 (reporting that the Prison Tails program at an Indiana prison was inspired by the Animal Planet show Cell Dogs); Julie Shaw, Program’s Cell-ing Point Helps Both Man & Beast, PHILLY.COM (Aug. 26, 2011) http://articles.philly.com/2011-08-26/news/29930629_1_shelter-dogs-philadelphia-prison- system-inmates (discussing the New Leash program and the fact that the founder saw the Cell Dogs program on Animal Planet and decided to begin one locally). 6 Brown, supra note 3 (discussing the establishment of programs at two Delaware prisons in 2012); Mihir Zaveri, Maryland Prisons Launch Dog-Training Program, WASH. POST (July 2, 2012, 4:03 PM), http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/Maryland -prisons-launch-dog-training-program/2012/07/02/gJQADIMrIW_blog.html (announcing the establishment of a program with America’s VetDogs to begin in August 2012). 7 See e.g., Prisoners Rehabilitate Death-row Dogs, NBCNEWS.COM (Oct. 3, 2006, 1:16 PM) http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15014860/#.Ul2PrxZOCFJ (citing a prison warden explaining that the Safe Harbor Prison Dog Program at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Kansas is one of the largest prison-based dog adoption programs, which helps reduce vio- lence among inmates). 8 Jennifer Sullivan, Cats Bringing out the Soft Side of Inmates, SEATTLE TIMES (May 3, 2012, 10:35 PM), http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2018135930_prisonpets04m.html (discussing the programs in the State of Washington); John L. Inman III, Tipton Correc- tional Center: 18th Missouri Prison to Implement ‘Puppies for Parole’ Program, CAL. DEM- OCRAT, May 30, 2012, at 11 (announcing the establishment of a program at a Missouri correctional center and stating that the other two facilities are not compatible with the pro- grams). See also Alan Johnson, “It Gave Me a Purpose,” COLUMBUS DISPATCH, NOV. 10, 2003, at A1 (reporting that a dog training program was in thirty out of thirty-three prisons in Ohio in 2003); Andrea Uhde Shepherd, Dog-Adoption Program Changes Lives Behind Bars, SUNDAY GAZETTE-MAIL (Charleston, W. Va.), May 8, 2011, at 10A (reporting that in Ken- tucky there are dog programs at twelve out of thirteen state prisons (with one just beginning) and at two private facilities). 9 E.g., Richard Crumbacker, Inmates, Staff Ready to Handle America’s Vet Dogs: Incarcer- ated Veterans Will Train Dogs Inside Prison to Work with Injured Veterans, CRISFIELD TIMES (Md.), July 11, 2012, at 4 (discussing the America’s VetDogs program and how it is consistent with other restorative justice programs); Pat Pheifer, Prisoners Paw it Forward: The Offenders at the Shakopee Women’s Prison Who Train Future Service Dogs Hope Their Work Will Give Back to the Community, STAR TRIB. (Minneapolis, Minn.), Jan. 10, 2010, at 1B (discussing a dog training program at a prison with the transition coordinator stating that “the dog training program fits well with the DOC’s philosophy of restorative justice”). \\jciprod01\productn\N\NVJ\14-1\NVJ102.txt unknown Seq: 3 21-JAN-14 17:18 Fall 2013] COMPANION ANIMAL PROGRAMS 27 The limited research in this phenomenon has considered the impact of the programs on the human prison population.10 This Article focuses on the legal and ethical issues involved with keeping companion animals in this very spe- cific institutional environment. First, this Article analyzes various types of pro- grams that correctional institutions have established and assesses common benefits of and challenges for the programs.11 Second, this Article considers programs that may allow for an inmate to have his or her “own” animal in a facility, including the question of whether service or assistance animals must be accommodated.12 Third, this Article evaluates the risks to humans involved with these programs and makes recommendations to ensure the safety of the participants to reduce the liability to the institutions and organizations involved.13 Fourth, this Article considers the ethical implications of having companion animals in these environments, focusing on whether it is an appro- priate placement for companion animals and providing guidance for those who wish to consider implementing or supporting such programs.14 II. TYPES OF TRAINING AND CARE PROGRAMS Each program at a correctional institution is likely to be unique in some aspects of its administration. This Part utilizes examples to illustrate the pri- mary categories of companion animal programs at correctional institutions. A. Shelter and Rescue Organization Animals In one type of program the inmates provide care and training for animals from local shelters or rescue organizations. These programs can either offer sheltering for the overflow from local shelters or rescue organizations, or focus on animals that may need additional care and training to become more adopta- ble. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, a few facilities took in animals dis- placed by the storm.15 The Dixon Correctional Institution housed over 200 animals, including dogs, cats, and poultry after the storm.16 The temporary pro- 10 E.g., Christiane Deaton, Humanizing Prisons with Animals: A Closer Look at “Cell Dogs” and Horse Programs in Correctional Institutions, 56 J.